Who is/was more divisive: Harper or Trudeau?

[g_bambino]

The Canadian Supreme Court... said that strictly speaking, we had no constitutional amending formula except a simple Act of the British parliament. It added that convention required some kind of provincial approval - without saying what that meant.

Trudeau took this to mean that with Ontario (Davis) and New Brunswick (Hatfield), he could go ahead and change the constitution which he fully intended to do. When the other provinces realized that Trudeau was going to do what he wanted anyway, they abandoned Quebec (in the famous Night of the Long Knives) and struck a deal with Trudeau/Chretien.

You've got it all backwards: the Gang of Eight (which included Quebec) went to the Supreme Court after Trudeau rejected their ideas on the constitution and made his threat to approach the British parliament without any prior provincial approval. What the Supreme Court then said was that Trudeau needed, by convention, the agreement of a "substantial" number of provinces; whatever "substantial" was intended to mean in that specific case, two out of ten does not in any way meet the word's definition.

It was later still, during the constitutional conferences in November 1981, that the Kitchen Accord was hatched.

[segnosaur]

He didn't do us any favours on the economic front. In addition to mounting a monumental national debt, he single-handedly destroyed our relations with the US.

Relations between Canada and the United States have become more strained than at any time in recent memory." So began a survey of U.S.-Canada relations published in Foreign Affairs in 1982, two years before Brian Mulroney first won the prime ministership. The Foreign Affairs authors were putting it mildly. Over the course of Pierre Trudeau's last term in office, the temperature of Canada's most important foreign relationship had plunged from chilly to icy.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=ea44c2a3-bbd4-49bd-bac7-3cbf450d6037

I guess his intellectualism and charisma kept him in the PM's chair a little too long.

Keep in mind that that particular article was written by David Frum, who is a well-known right-wing writer/activist. That doesn't necessarily mean that he's wrong, but people should be cautious about accepting opinion columns as 'proof'.

[wyly]

Harper by far. Trudeau was PM through many years of difficult times much more difficult then anything Harper will likely face. Harper is really just an American patsy. Harper has even bragged about watching American news rather than Canadian news. Harper is like a dog on a leash beside his American master.

you may be right...ahereing to american neocon beliefs Harper is bringing in a divisive type of politics...plus his deliberate maneuvers to drive a wedge between urban and rural canadians for personal political gain...

[segnosaur]

At least Trudeau was enough the law-abiding PM to negotiate constitutional changes as opposed to Harper, who wholesale invented the idea of executive privilege, which was expressly denied by Parliament three centuries ago when they made themselves supreme over the Crown.

Actually, British parliamentary tradition has a long tradition of "Orders-in-Council", allowing the government to make political appointments and pass certain limited laws/regulations without requiring a vote. I'm pretty sure every prime minister has used them since confederation (including Chretien), so you can't suggest Harper was the only one who "invented the idea of executive privilege".

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order-in-Council

http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca/oic-ddc.asp?lang=eng&Page=secretariats

[g_bambino]

Actually, British parliamentary tradition has a long tradition of "Orders-in-Council"...

TB is talking about when the Ministers of the Crown refused to meet parliament's demands for information on the Afghan detainee issue.

[Moonbox]

Harper by far. Trudeau was PM through many years of difficult times much more difficult then anything Harper will likely face. Harper is really just an American patsy. Harper has even bragged about watching American news rather than Canadian news. Harper is like a dog on a leash beside his American master.

I guess you missed the whole 2008/2009 recession. I'm pretty sure Trudeau never had to deal with anything close to as rough as that. Nonetheless, he still managed to take Canada from deficit-free to practically broke in a decade, paving the way for the next idiot (and the one who should join Trudeau on this poll instead of Harper).

Think about it. Trudeau made Western Canada a toxic wasteland for the Liberal party, from which it has never recovered. He inspired 30+ years of anti-Liberal party sentiment in the west. Not only that, but along with Mulroney he paved the way for the BQ and PQ to run things for the next 30 years in Quebec as well.

Harper is LEAGUES behind Trudeau and Mulroney on divisiveness. I don't even understand how he can be compared.

[ToadBrother]

Actually, British parliamentary tradition has a long tradition of "Orders-in-Council", allowing the government to make political appointments and pass certain limited laws/regulations without requiring a vote. I'm pretty sure every prime minister has used them since confederation (including Chretien), so you can't suggest Harper was the only one who "invented the idea of executive privilege".

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order-in-Council

http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca/oic-ddc.asp?lang=eng&Page=secretariats

Orders in council are well-established constitutional rights of the Executive (they are, however, not unlimited, and certainly cannot hold legal weight without at least the tacit approval of Parliament, or more to the point, Parliament can, at its pleasure, revoke, modify or negate them).

By Executive Privilege, I speak of the notion that the Executive may, if it deems necessary, prevent Parliament from access to the actions of the Executive, including documents, negotiations, etc. That is not part of our constitution. In fact, quite the opposite, it's one of the chief reasons Charles I ended up lighter the weight of his head. He made exactly the same argument that the Tories did earlier this year, and Parliament then absolutely rejected that principle, and ultimately, with the Glorious Revolution and the Bill of Rights, 1689 established that Parliament's control over the Executive is absolute.

Edited September 28, 2010 by ToadBrother

[ToadBrother]

TB is talking about when the Ministers of the Crown refused to meet parliament's demands for information on the Afghan detainee issue.

Even Orders in council cannot be used to defy Parliament. Parliament can still, if it sees fit, override such statutory instruments. There is nothing the Crown or its Ministers can do that Parliament cannot compel revelation of if it sees fit. Parliament is supreme over the actions of the Government.

[capricorn]

Keep in mind that that particular article was written by David Frum, who is a well-known right-wing writer/activist. That doesn't necessarily mean that he's wrong, but people should be cautious about accepting opinion columns as 'proof'.

Point taken.

[capricorn]

I seldom read a media article without sampling the views of my fellow Canadians. (OK, I do skip over comments on the CBC news site.) Re Lorne Gunter's contribution on Trudeau's legacy, this comment stood out.

5:43 PM on September 29, 2010

As a young immigrant to this country in 1968 I was greatly impressed by the bright and exciting PET and ,lacking much in the way of critical thinking and experience, was eager to support him. Now from a distance and tempered by rational life experience I stand ready with a STAKE if someone would be kind enough to dig him up for me.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/09/29/lorne-gunter-trudeaus-impact-is-obvious-its-also-mostly-bad/

I guess Willy is saying P.E. Trudeau is not dead enough for his liking.

[RNG]

I seldom read a media article without sampling the views of my fellow Canadians. (OK, I do skip over comments on the CBC news site.) Re Lorne Gunter's contribution on Trudeau's legacy, this comment stood out.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/09/29/lorne-gunter-trudeaus-impact-is-obvious-its-also-mostly-bad/

I guess Willy is saying P.E. Trudeau is not dead enough for his liking.

That's what makes me like him.

[Evening Star]

It's funny. While I despise the viewpoint behind that opinion piece, it actually does much to highlight what I like about Trudeau.

[Evening Star]

xpost!